An Idea Whose Time is Here: Term Limits ⋆ Politicrossing
Connect with us

News

An Idea Whose Time is Here: Term Limits

Those elected to Congress in their 30s or 40s can end up serving for 30 to 40 years or more

Published

on

The science is settled! (as one party likes to say repeatedly). We’re living far longer and healthier than ever before. In 1900, the median age of Americans at the age of death was 49 years old. In 2018,  that figure had risen to above age 80.

As our life spans increase, no one thinks beans about dementia-free septuagenarians running for president, and soon enough, an octogenarian, someone in his or her 80s, will run for president, and such a candidate could win. That brings us to the issue of term limits.

When the Founding Fathers first drafted the Constitution setting out the ground rules as to who could be a senator or congressional representative, they couldn’t easily have foreseen the advanced life spans to which we have aspired.

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Bite-Sized Motivation

For sure, Ben Franklin lived to be 84 years old, Thomas Jefferson 83, James Madison 85, and John Adams 90. However, they were anomalies for their era. George Washington only made it to 67. As late as 1970, life expectancy in the U.S. hovered at a fraction above age 70.

Swamp Things Who Refuse to Die

We’re faced with the current reality that congressional representatives and senators, elected in their 30s or 40s can end up serving for 30 to 40 years or more. We have a vile and vindictive Nancy Pelosi now 81; a man of spirits, Patrick Leahy, approaching 81; and “did we leak?”Dianne Feinstein, 87; all who should have been un-elected decades ago.

A few Republicans have served long as well; Chuck Grassley, 87, and Richard Shelby, 86, come to mind. In any case, serving more than 30 years in the Senate, indeed more than 24 years, and, it could be argued, more than 18 years, is probably way too much. The Founding Fathers did not envision congressional representation as a career, let alone, a lifetime avocation.

Seven-year senator Ted Kennedy, in a jurisdiction outside of Massachusetts, could have been convicted for manslaughter or at least leaving the scene of an accident and lying to county and city officials regarding the death of Mary Jo Kopechne. Yet, he served another 40 years in the Senate, for a total of 47 years.

A Big Push is Needed

A push for term limits is not going to happen under Biden, or whoever is running the show from the White House, and his cronies in the Senate and House of Representatives. Unfortunately, when the Trump administration had a GOP majority in the House and the Senate, it did not push for term limits. That would have been the most opportune time.

If a push for term limits were to magically happen, the first order of business would be to determine an appropriate term length for senators and representatives. I suggest three terms in the Senate, totaling 18 years.

I suggest six terms in the house totaling 12 years. Why the disparity? Senators, being lesser in number in most states, don’t run as often and need to generate influence during their tenure. Moreover, continuity of leadership seems vital in the senate.

In the House, congressional representatives are virtually running for office perpetually, so six elections is plenty. A limit of 12 years would eliminate maniacal leaders (hint: Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Maxine Waters, Eric Swalwell) from rising to the top and staying put decades past the time that they are already harming America.

Career Politicians Excluded

William F. Buckley once said something along the lines of, “I would sooner be governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than by the 2,000 members of the faculty of Harvard.” As corollary, I would sooner be governed by the first 2,000 names in any swing state city phone directory than by the 117th Congress.

An underlying problem with this or any congress, ever supporting a term limits amendment, is that whoever is in power at the time likely doesn’t want this amendment drive to proceed. For the good of the country, however, some patriots might proceed, recognizing that the strength of America, far into the future, is more important than their particular tenure.

Perhaps a Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, Tim Scott, Tom Cotton, or Marsha Blackburn would be strong vocal proponents, especially if and when they knew that a sound approach to governing was in place. Thankfully, a group called U.S. Term Limits is seeking to initiate a convention under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, to propose a term limits amendment for the U.S. House and Senate.

– – – – –

 

We'd love to hear your thoughts about this article. Please take a minute to share them in the comment section by clicking here. Or carry the conversation over on your favorite social network by clicking one of the share buttons below.


Jeff Davidson is the world's only holder of the title "The Work-Life Balance Expert®" as awarded by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He is the premier thought leader on work-life balance, integration, and harmony. Jeff speaks to organizations that seek to enhance their overall productivity by improving the effectiveness of their people. He is the author of Breathing Space, Simpler Living, Dial it Down, and Everyday Project Management. Visit www.BreathingSpace.com for more information on Jeff's keynote speeches and seminars, including: Managing the Pace with Grace® * Achieving Work-Life Balance™ * Managing Information and Communication Overload®



 
 
 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.



News

Antisemitic college demonstrators should be expelled

Published

on

Jewish students are being assaulted on American and European campuses with a viciousness that is reminiscent of 1938 Nazi Germany. The demonstrators, many of whom are professional agitators in their 40s who have been trained to cause mayhem, scream “kill the Jews” as they physically prevent Jewish students from attending classes. Jewish students were told to “go back to Poland.” In New York City, Jewish students at Cooper Union sheltered in a library while pro-Palestinian demonstrators banged on its glass windows and doors. Protesters at Tulane University assaulted a Jewish student, breaking his nose.

“This truly has been the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation,” said Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students in the UK, “and its impacts run deep throughout the Jewish student population.”

With few notable exceptions, college administrators have coddled the demonstrators instead of expelling them for committing assault, destroying university property and creating an unsafe environment. Local police have been told to stand down instead of enforcing the law.

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Bite-Sized Motivation

When it comes to choosing sides between violent antisemitic demonstrators and Jewish students who simply want an education, I am clearly coming to the defense of the innocent students. Instead of hearing angry responses from people who object to the flagrant contempt by the demonstrators for law and order, we have witnessed members of Congress, led by Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Cori Bush (D-Minn.), express their demands that police should protect the violent demonstrators.

Omar and Bush have compared police responses after pro-Hamas protests on campus to the so-called Kent State massacre of May 4, 1970, where four students were killed by the Ohio National Guard. The students in that case were protesting against American military involvement in Vietnam. “On the 54th anniversary of the Kent State Massacre, students across our country are being brutalized for standing up to endless war,” Bush tweeted on X. “Our country must learn to actually uphold the rights of free speech & assembly upon which it was founded. Solidarity with our students.”

Are we denying the free speech and assembly rights of the demonstrators? The real question is, should we protect speech when it becomes violent? The answer is straightforward. When violence occurs, it is no longer about protecting free speech—the rule of law must be upheld. “Violence, vandalism, and antisemitic harassment and intimidation are not free speech and those engaging in this behavior should be held accountable,” read a statement from Congressman Adam Schiff’s office.

When it comes to free speech, the pro-Hamas protestors are intolerant of opposing points-of-view. One student at Columbia University made that clear when she expressed sympathy with pro-Palestinian protesters and not with students of opposing views. “At the end of the day,” she said, “I don’t want a relationship with students who don’t support the cause.” Free speech for me but not for thee.

Many of the current crop of demonstrators who are physically assaulting Jewish students, shouting “death to the Jews,” believe they have the right to exercise violence in support of their views and think they should bear no consequences for their violent actions. They are upset at the prospect of being suspended or expelled. Most of them wear keffiyeh and Covid masks, presumably to protect their future Goldman Sachs job prospects.

“I think that the university needs to start with dismissing all their charges against the students if they want to rebuild trust,” said a deluded student at Columbia. Alex Morey, director of campus rights advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, disagreed. “That doesn’t mean that students are immune from the consequences of their actions,” Morey said. “You don’t want to see cops in riot gear descend on peaceful student protests. But if they’re breaking the rules and engaging in civil disobedience … sometimes that’s what has to happen,” she says.

Beating up Jewish students and destroying campus property do not come under the heading of civil disobedience. They constitute a flagrant contempt for law and order. Such activities must be stopped right at the outset. Jewish students across America are terrified, as they should be. They will not feel safe on their college campuses as long as hateful, antisemitic rhetoric, violence or intimidation go unaddressed.

Violent, antisemitic demonstrators deserve to be arrested, put in jail, and then expelled from the university. Campus administrators like Minouche Shafik at Columbia who attempt to negotiate with the neo-Nazis are doing a disservice to our republic. University leaders should take “personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students on campus, said UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. This is not 1938 and we must not give an inch to the haters.

Ed Brodow is a conservative political commentator and author of two No. 1 Amazon Best Sellers, AMERICA ON ITS KNEES: The Cost of Replacing Trump with Biden, and THE WAR ON WHITES: How Hating White People Became the New National Sport.

Continue Reading

News

Biden: Admit Hamas Terrorists

Published

on

Joe Biden’s policies reflect the contempt he and his handlers have for our country. The latest example is Joe’s announcement that he wants to bring thousands of Palestinian “refugees” into the US with a pathway to citizenship. This will certainly include members of the terrorist organization known as Hamas. In what conceivable way does this benefit America? “Whatever hurts America the most,” said author Sean Parnell, “is often where the Biden Administration lands on any given issue.”

According to CBS News, “The Biden administration is considering bringing certain Palestinians to the US as refugees, a move that would offer a permanent safe haven to some of those fleeing war-torn Gaza, according to internal federal government documents.” Which Palestinians? Those “who have immediate family members who are American citizens or permanent residents. Those who pass a series of eligibility, medical and security screenings would qualify to fly to the US with refugee status, which offers beneficiaries permanent residency, resettlement benefits like housing assistance and a path to American citizenship.”

Requiring a connection to “American citizens or permanent residents” is a subterfuge when you consider that activists in Dearborn, Michigan were heard chanting “death to America.” These people, who support Hamas and its terrorist activities, make it likely that we would be admitting Hamas terrorists. It is important to recognize, as pointed out by journalist Katie Pavlich, that the Palestinian Center for Policy Survey and Research found that 72 percent of Palestinian respondents believe that Hamas’ attack on October 7 was “correct.”

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Bite-Sized Motivation

As reported in Townhall, “A ‘path to American citizenship’ would also mean that these people would get to vote, likely one more tactic of how Biden is looking to gain support from the far-left, anti-Israel part of the Democratic Party. The Biden administration would thus not just be bringing over future potential Democratic voters, but be bringing over ones who are among a population that we know supports Hamas and their attack against our ally in the Middle East.”

A wave of commentators condemned Biden’s plans. “We are ruled by malicious traitors,” said Blaze commentator Auron MacIntyre. “Horrifying,” said NewsBusters managing editor Curtis Houck. “We are a nation committing suicide.”

“Anyone seeing the protests on college campuses right now should not need to be told why ideology matters when conferring the privilege of access to the United States to outsiders,” said Daily Wire reporter Megan Basham. “We do not need more people here whose worldview so clearly clashes with that of the American founding. We should not accept immigrants from among people known to harbor terrorists.”

More than two dozen Republican senators are calling Biden’s policy a national security risk. As reported in The Hill, “The GOP senators doubt that the Biden administration could prevent Hamas-members or other members of a terrorist group from entering the US. ‘We are not confident that your administration can adequately vet this high-risk population for terrorist ties and sympathies before admitting them into the United States,’ they wrote.”

“The open border isn’t enough,” Senate Republicans added. “Now Biden wants to import people who supported the murder and rape of Israelis. Unfortunately, the risk of terrorists entering our homeland is no hypothetical matter,” the senators wrote, citing that in 2023 border officials arrested 169 people on the FBI terror watchlist.

“President Biden consistently undermines our national security with reckless decisions like this,” said Sen. Tim Scott. “We have no clue who is coming into our country, whether on our southern border or from war-torn regions run by terrorists. Not a single Hamas sympathizer should be let into this country.”

The administration kept its intentions secret until this week. No one knew about it. Commentator Mark Levin is angry that Congress did not seem to know about it, or if they did, nothing was done to stop it.

Biden’s anti-American actions prove that he is an infiltrator. Does he do the bidding of Iran or China? The Squad also are infiltrators—they have infiltrated our Congress. They hate America. What sort of country allows this? If he gets another four years, Joe and his Obama/Soros puppet masters will complete the destruction of our country.

“Other insanities aside,” someone tweeted, “this is politically insane. Biden is forcing people to consider voting for Trump. I have every intention of leaving President blank in Nov, but not if Biden insists on opening the doors to a terrorist state.”

Ed Brodow is a conservative political commentator and author of two No. 1 Amazon Best Sellers, AMERICA ON ITS KNEES: The Cost of Replacing Trump with Biden, and THE WAR ON WHITES: How Hating White People Became the New National Sport.

Continue Reading

 

Trending